Opinion - Congress can't just hand over the checkbook to the executive branch
At a recent House Appropriations Committee markup, something happened that should alarm every American, especially those who believe in accountability.
I introduced a simple amendment. All it said was that Congress, not the president, decides how taxpayer money is spent. That is not a radical idea. It is in the Constitution. It is our job.
So I asked my Republican colleagues: Are we a co-equal branch of government? Do we still control how money gets spent?
Their answer was no. They voted against the amendment.
Just imagine that. Members of Congress voting to give up the very job they were elected to do.
The Appropriations Committee exists to decide how your tax dollars are used. That has been the job of Congress since the beginning of the republic. It is written into Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. Since 1974, federal law has made it even clearer. Congress decides where the money goes. Not the president. Not unelected officials. Congress.
Past presidents, even when they disagreed with Congress, recognized that spending decisions had to come from lawmakers. They did not always like it, but they respected it.
What we are seeing now is different. President Trump's team is saying they can simply cancel funding that Congress already approved. That is new. That is dangerous. That is illegal.
That is why I offered the amendment. It was not a stunt. It was not partisan. It was a reminder of what we were sent here to do.
If Congress does not stand up now, we may never get this responsibility back. We manage $2 trillion a year. If we do not do our jobs, someone else will. And that someone will not be elected or accountable to the people.
So I ask my Republican colleagues. What are you afraid of? When you vote to give up your job, you are not just weakening Congress. You are letting down the roughly 750,000 people you swore to represent. And for what? Political loyalty? Fear?
I think about the generations of lawmakers who served on the House Appropriations Committee. Republicans and Democrats alike understood the weight of their responsibility. They did not walk away from it. They defended it.
That is what I am doing now. Because this is not about party. It is about whether the House of Representatives still represents the people. Or whether we have become irrelevant.
We must remember our role before it's too late.
Mike Levin represents California's 49th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
13 minutes ago
- E&E News
GOP releases megabill text with land sales, tax credit rollbacks
The Senate released new megabill text overnight with stricter treatment for renewable energy incentives from the Democrats' climate law — a major blow to companies and some lawmakers lobbying for more leniency. The updated legislation also includes Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chair Mike Lee's latest plan to sell certain federal public land for housing. The new Senate Finance Committee text looks a lot more like the House-passed bill when it comes to an array of contested tax credits. Advertisement It would drastically phase out wind and solar credits while maintaining incentives for Republican-friendly energy sources like nuclear and geothermal. Specifically, the bill would cut off incentives for projects that aren't 'placed in service' — or plugged into the grid — by the end of 2028. That's more aggressive than the previous Senate draft that preserved those credits for projects that merely 'start construction' by the end of the year. On the other hand, the legislation has a notable victory for hydrogen. It would extend incentives for clean hydrogen production to 2028, instead of eliminating them this year, as the previous Senate version proposed. Some provisions stayed the same. Senators kept credits for non-carbon energy sources, including nuclear, hydropower and geothermal, for projects that start construction by 2033. Senators also kept 'transferability,' which allows project sponsors to transfer credits to a third party. And the new language largely kept provisions barring companies from using materials from China or other adversary nations, while moving some deadlines for compliance sooner. The Senate parliamentarian was reviewing at least portions of this section. Companies were hoping for more lenient treatment to allow supply chains to develop. Senators continued to target wind turbines and their parts, which would no longer receive advanced manufacturing tax credits by 2028. Critical mineral incentives would be phased out, as well, except for metallurgical coal. The bill proposes moving the end of the electric vehicle tax credits to Sept. 30, up from the six-month timeline previously proposed, while credits for charging infrastructure would end in June 2026. Negotiators added a new bonus tax incentive for certain advanced nuclear power facilities built in areas with significant nuclear industry employment. A number of House and Senate defenders of the climate law credits, under intense lobbying from companies, were looking to make sure renewable energy projects had more time to benefit. But conservatives and President Donald Trump fought in the opposite direction. Public lands Lee's latest proposal would order the sale of up to 0.5 percent of Bureau of Land Management land across 11 states. Only lands that fall within five miles of a population center would be eligible, and protected lands excluded. The parliamentarian had ruled an earlier land sales plan ineligible for passage by simple majority under the budget reconciliation process. She had yet to rule on Lee's new framework Friday night. The updated text would set aside money from each sale for hunting, fishing and recreational amenities. That after outdoor advocates on the right expressed concern. Still, a number of Republican lawmakers in both chambers have balked at any public land sale plan in the megabill and would push to strip it before final passage. Other provisions The Energy and Natural Resources portion of the budget reconciliation package would still claw back Department of Energy money from the Inflation Reduction Act. However, it would expand to $1 billion a new energy dominance loan program. Energy Secretary Chris Wright had lobbied for loan office funding, particularly for nuclear projects. The broader legislation includes other IRA spending rollbacks, a decade-long delay of the methane fee and zero fees on automakers for not complying with the Department of Transportation's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. The megabill would mandate oil and gas lease sales onshore and offshore, including in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The state would increasingly share the revenues from development there. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has been a holdout on several big ticket items during the negotiations, particularly related to Medicaid cuts.
Washington Post
16 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Eight charts that explain the Supreme Court's term
The Supreme Court's just-finished term featured major rulings as varied as nationwide injunctions on President Donald Trump's ban on birthright citizenship, gender-transition care for minors, religious liberties, and a bid to create the nation's first religious public charter school. There were multiple fierce clashes among the justices over Trump's second-term agenda.
The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
Revised Senate bill includes updated Lee language to sell public lands
The 940-page bill Senate Republican leaders unveiled Friday night to implement President Trump's agenda includes a section pushed by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) to sell public lands, although a smaller amount of land than was in a provision rejected earlier in the week by Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough. The updated language in the bill directs the secretary of the Interior Department to select for sale not less than 0.25 percent and not more than 0.50 percent of the Bureau of Land Management's land with certain restrictions. The Interior secretary would be directed to 'dispose' of land that has the 'highest value,' is nominated for sale by state and local governments, is adjacent to existing developed areas, has access to existing infrastructure and is suitable for residential housing. Any land sold by the Interior Department must be used solely for the development of housing or to build infrastructure to support housing. Federally protected land including national monuments, national recreation areas, components of national wilderness and components of national wild and scenic rivers would be excluded from sale. Interior would not be allowed to sell public lands located more than five miles from the border of a population center of at least 1,000 people. The revised language reduces the amount of land the Interior Department would be allowed to sell compared to legislation Lee unveiled earlier this month. The earlier text directed the Interior secretary to select between 0.5 percent and 0.75 percent of Bureau of Land Management land for sale. The Senate parliamentarian on Monday ruled that the original language mandating the sale of millions of acres of public land from both the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service violated the Byrd Rule. The Byrd Rule determines what legislation is eligible to be protected from a filibuster and allowed to pass the Senate with a simple-majority vote. Provisions must be primarily budgetary in nature to comply with the Byrd Rule. The provisions would apply to public lands in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. The issue is controversial, even among Republicans. Five House Republicans this week said they would vote against the bill if the provision remained in it when it came back to the lower chamber. Senate Republicans are racing to pass the Trump agenda megabill this weekend despite a number of uncertainties. Leadership had hoped to hold a vote Saturday but the timing remains fluid.
